Joel Díaz

P Brooklyn Cyclones

Age 23 RHP 6'2" / 208 lbs A+ Svc 0.0 · Ctrl thru 2033 peak 0.7 · 2029

Overview

A+PROSPECTMiLBFA 2034

OGV OFP40OGV rank#317ETA2029MLB%0%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	20	MIX2 levels	20	17	74	4.48	4.42	21.6%	8.5%	—	K 15.2% · BB 10.9% · FIP 6.63
2025	21	A+NYM	25	18	107	3.80	3.03	21.9%	5.4%	—	K 16.8% · BB 6.2% · FIP 3.74
2026	22	MIX3 levels	19	14	56	6.75	4.40	19.4%	15.6%	—	K 15.7% · BB 18.2% · FIP 5.01
2027PROJ	23	MLBNYM	—	—	0	5.02	5.02	17.1%	11.4%	—
2028PROJ31% MLB	24	MLBNYM	5	5	30	4.78	4.68	19.2%	10.2%	0.3
2029PROJ51% MLB	25	MLBNYM	9	9	53	4.58	4.48	20.5%	9.4%	0.6

Next 3 projected WAR 0.8Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

ContractESTIMATED

Control thru2033Service0.0First FA2034

2027MiLB2028Pre-Arb$0.8M2029Pre-Arb$0.8M2030Pre-Arb$0.8M2031Arb-1$2M2032Arb-2$4M2033Arb-3$4M

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.5 / P90 3.0, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 92%

CompsJeremy Lee (age 22) · Levi Thomas (age 23) · Nick Hull (age 23)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 129120vR 112

ERA5.02

FIP5.02

K%17.1%

BB%11.4%

K-BB%5.7%

Proj IP90

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 90 IP

━ projected WAR━ paid WAR ($/8M) surplus deficit━ post-control+$20M ctrl surplus

Contract

Contract ESTIMATED · service-time + WAR-based estimator (needs verification)

Status MiLB

MLB Debut 2028

Service 0 yrs (est)

Team Control Through 2033

First FA Year 2034

Year	Status	Salary	Proj WAR	Value	Surplus
2027	MiLB	still in minors · estimated debut 2028
2028	Pre-Arb	$0.8M	+0.3	$1M	+$0.4M
2029	Pre-Arb	$0.8M	+0.6	$2M	+$1M
2030	Pre-Arb	$0.8M	+0.8	$3M	+$2M
2031	Arb-1	$2M	+0.9	$3M	+$1M
2032	Arb-2	$4M	+0.8	$2M	+$0.0M
2033	Arb-3	$4M	+0.7	$2M	+$0.0M (cut)
Totals		$9M		$12M	+$5M

Career Stats + Projections

Real MLB stats plus park-adjusted projections — this season (so far / rest / full), then future seasons and career totals.

show model inputsbasis chips: RAW = as recorded · CTX = with park/league context · A+C = actual + context combined · MLE = level/park-neutral

Methodology▸ how WAR & MLE are computed

Stats are park-neutral MLB equivalents. The "TEAM" column shows current org affiliation only — we do NOT project at that team's park.
Rates (K%, BB%, HR-BF) are park-stripped; MiLB stat lines are translated to their MLB-equivalent via per-level MLE factors.
WAR is computed from projected runs prevented vs a replacement pitcher (the marginal arm a team would call up if this pitcher were unavailable) — calibrated to the standard WAR scale.

Year	Age	Lvl	Team	G	GS	IP	BF	K	BB	HR	GS%	IP/G	K%	BB%	K-BB%	HR%	ERA	FIP	WAR
▸ Career — actual stats, one row per year (as recorded, no adjustments)
▸ Career — adjusted (each season translated to a park/league-neutral MLB-equivalent line; levels combined per year)
▸ Model inputs — neutral MLE (past 3 seasons + 2027 so far)
2021	17	ROK MLE	DSL Mets 2	15	15	50	195	63	9	0	100%	3.4	22.0%	5.8%	16.2%	0.0%	0.54	1.98	—
2021	17	ROK RAW	DSL Mets 2	15	15	50	195	63	9	0	100%	3.4	32.3%	4.6%	27.7%	0.0%	0.54	1.13	—
2022	18	A MLE	St. Lucie Mets	16	10	55	247	51	25	7	62%	3.5	15.3%	11.9%	3.3%	3.9%	5.86	5.45	—
2022	18	A RAW	St. Lucie Mets	16	10	55	247	51	25	7	62%	3.5	20.6%	10.1%	10.5%	2.8%	5.86	4.26	—
2024	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	20	17	74	329	71	28	12	85%	3.7	15.2%	10.9%	4.3%	6.3%	4.48	6.63	—
2024	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	20	17	74	329	71	28	12	85%	3.7	15.2%	10.9%	4.3%	6.3%	4.48	6.63	—
2024	20	MIX RAW	2 levels	20	17	74	329	71	28	12	85%	3.7	21.6%	8.5%	13.1%	3.6%	4.48	4.42	—
2025	21	A+ MLE	Brooklyn Cyclones	25	18	107	448	98	24	9	72%	4.3	16.8%	6.2%	10.7%	2.3%	3.80	3.74	—
2025	21	A+ MLE	Brooklyn Cyclones	25	18	107	448	98	24	9	72%	4.3	16.8%	6.2%	10.7%	2.3%	3.80	3.74	—
2025	21	A+ RAW	Brooklyn Cyclones	25	18	107	448	98	24	9	72%	4.3	21.9%	5.4%	16.5%	2.0%	3.80	3.03	—
2026	22	MIX MLE	3 levels	19	14	56	263	51	41	4	74%	2.9	15.7%	18.2%	-2.5%	1.7%	6.75	5.01	—
2026	22	MIX MLE	3 levels	19	14	56	263	51	41	4	74%	2.9	15.7%	18.2%	-2.5%	1.7%	6.75	5.01	—
2026	22	MIX RAW	3 levels	19	14	56	263	51	41	4	74%	2.9	19.4%	15.6%	3.8%	1.5%	6.75	4.40	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	23	MLB	NYM	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	17.1%	11.4%	5.7%	2.8%	5.02	5.02	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	24	MLB MLE	NYM	18	18	98	415	80	42	12	100%	5.5	19.2%	10.2%	9.0%	2.8%	4.78	4.68	+0.8
2029	25	MLB MLE	NYM	18	18	103	435	89	41	12	100%	5.7	20.5%	9.4%	11.1%	2.8%	4.58	4.48	+1.1
2030	26	MLB MLE	NYM	18	18	109	460	98	43	13	100%	6.1	21.3%	9.3%	12.0%	2.8%	4.47	4.40	+1.3
2031	27	MLB MLE	NYM	18	18	105	445	95	42	13	100%	5.9	21.3%	9.3%	12.0%	2.9%	4.45	4.43	+1.2
2032	28	MLB MLE	NYM	17	17	100	423	90	40	13	100%	5.9	21.2%	9.5%	11.7%	3.0%	4.49	4.52	+1.0
2033	29	MLB MLE	NYM	16	16	93	394	83	38	12	100%	5.8	20.9%	9.7%	11.2%	3.1%	4.58	4.65	+0.8
2034	30	MLB MLE	NYM	14	14	85	358	74	36	12	100%	6.0	20.6%	10.0%	10.6%	3.3%	4.73	4.83	+0.6
2035	31	MLB MLE	NYM	13	13	76	320	65	33	11	100%	5.8	20.2%	10.4%	9.8%	3.5%	4.91	5.03	+0.3
2036	32	MLB MLE	NYM	11	11	67	285	56	31	11	100%	6.1	19.8%	10.8%	9.0%	3.8%	5.12	5.25	+0.1
2028	24	MLB CTX	NYM	5	5	30	127	24	13	4	100%	6.0	19.2%	10.2%	9.0%	2.8%	4.78	4.68	+0.3
2029	25	MLB CTX	NYM	9	9	53	224	46	21	6	100%	5.9	20.5%	9.4%	11.1%	2.8%	4.58	4.48	+0.6
2030	26	MLB CTX	NYM	12	12	71	300	64	28	8	100%	5.9	21.3%	9.3%	12.0%	2.8%	4.47	4.40	+0.8
2031	27	MLB CTX	NYM	13	13	77	325	69	30	9	100%	5.9	21.3%	9.3%	12.0%	2.8%	4.45	4.43	+0.9
2032	28	MLB CTX	NYM	13	13	79	334	71	32	10	100%	6.1	21.2%	9.5%	11.7%	2.9%	4.49	4.52	+0.8
2033	29	MLB CTX	NYM	13	13	77	325	68	32	10	100%	5.9	20.9%	9.7%	11.2%	3.1%	4.58	4.65	+0.7
2034	30	MLB CTX	NYM	12	12	72	304	63	30	10	100%	6.0	20.6%	10.0%	10.6%	3.3%	4.73	4.83	+0.5
2035	31	MLB CTX	NYM	11	11	67	283	57	29	10	100%	6.1	20.2%	10.4%	9.8%	3.5%	4.91	5.03	+0.3
2036	32	MLB CTX	NYM	10	10	60	253	50	27	10	100%	6.0	19.8%	10.8%	9.0%	3.8%	5.11	5.24	+0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		98	98	587	2480	513	243	77	100%	6.0	20.7%	9.8%	10.9%	3.1%	4.65	4.30	+7.6
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		34	34	200	844	175	83	26	100%	6.0	20.7%	9.8%	10.9%	3.1%	4.65	4.30	+2.6
Career	—	MLE		95	74	343	1482	247	152	45	78%	3.6	16.7%	10.3%	6.4%	3.0%	4.28	4.66	+7.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		55	43	200	865	144	89	26	78%	3.6	16.7%	10.3%	6.4%	3.0%	4.28	4.66	+1.7

How the minor-league lines were translated

One row per minor-league stint. Open a row to see each step: the raw rate, the park adjustment, the league/level factor, the age adjustment (hitters) and the resulting MLE rate. Factors are the same ones listed on the MLE Factors page.

2026 A+Brooklyn Cyclones · 48 IPFIP 4.13 → 5.01 (+0.88)K% 20.4% → 15.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.36%	—	×0.770	15.68%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	15.84%	—	×1.150	18.21%
HR / BF /BF	1.36%	÷1.000	×1.250	1.70%

Factors used: pitcher A+ level factors — K ×0.77, BB ×1.15, HR ×1.25. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 100).

Result: FIP 4.13 → 5.01, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2026 ASt. Lucie Mets · 6 IPFIP 3.80 → 4.55 (+0.75)K% 16.7% → 12.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	16.67%	—	×0.740	12.33%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.67%	—	×1.180	19.67%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×1.300	0.00%

Factors used: pitcher A level factors — K ×0.74, BB ×1.18, HR ×1.30. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 100).

Result: FIP 3.80 → 4.55, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2025 A+Brooklyn Cyclones · 107 IPFIP 3.03 → 3.74 (+0.71)K% 21.9% → 16.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.88%	—	×0.770	16.84%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.36%	—	×1.150	6.16%
HR / BF /BF	2.01%	÷1.073	×1.250	2.34%

Result: FIP 3.03 → 3.74, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2024 ASt. Lucie Mets · 68 IPFIP 4.72 → 6.63 (+1.91)K% 20.5% → 15.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.53%	—	×0.740	15.19%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.27%	—	×1.180	10.94%
HR / BF /BF	3.97%	÷0.826	×1.300	6.25%

Result: FIP 4.72 → 6.63, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2024 ROKFCL Mets · 7 IPFIP 0.29 → 1.19 (+0.90)K% 33.3% → 22.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.33%	—	×0.680	22.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	0.00%	—	×1.250	0.00%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.974	×1.400	0.00%

Factors used: pitcher ROK level factors — K ×0.68, BB ×1.25, HR ×1.40. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 95).

Result: FIP 0.29 → 1.19, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2022 ASt. Lucie Mets · 55 IPFIP 4.19 → 5.45 (+1.26)K% 20.6% → 15.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.65%	—	×0.740	15.28%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.12%	—	×1.180	11.94%
HR / BF /BF	2.83%	÷0.949	×1.300	3.88%

Result: FIP 4.19 → 5.45, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2021 ROKDSL Mets 2 · 50 IPFIP 0.96 → 1.98 (+1.02)K% 32.3% → 22.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	32.31%	—	×0.680	21.97%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.62%	—	×1.250	5.77%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×1.400	0.00%

Result: FIP 0.96 → 1.98, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

Career Path Comps

What happened to similar pitchers from this age · Y-axis: ERA+ (100 = league avg, 150 = elite, 80 = below) · Bands: P10–P90 outer, P25–P75 inner · Gold: OGILVIE projection

			Profile at Match Age					Next 3 Yrs				Career
Comp	Age	Role	FIP	K%	BB%	HR/BF	BABIP	FIP	K%	K-BB%	IP	ΔFIP	Low FIP	IP	Match
Joel Díaz (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	2.8%	—	4.52	20.4%	10.7%	310	-0.50	—	—	—
Jeremy Lee R 2024 · 4.17 FIP	22	SP-	4.17	16.8%	11.5%	1.9%	.318	5.21	11.2%	-0.5%	46	+1.04	4.17	125	90
Levi Thomas R 2021 · 5.22 FIP	23	SP-	5.22	18.1%	11.9%	3.9%	.328	5.16	20.8%	3.3%	31	-0.06	5.16	116	89
Nick Hull R 2023 · 4.26 FIP	23	SP-	4.26	17.2%	12.1%	2.0%	.251	4.83	17.8%	6.5%	200	+0.57	4.26	292	88
Tanner Hall R 2024 · 4.67 FIP	22	SP-	4.67	18.8%	11.2%	3.2%	.295	5.33	10.1%	-4.6%	72	+0.66	4.67	137	88
Derek True R 2024 · 4.90 FIP	23	SP-	4.90	18.5%	10.5%	3.7%	.333	4.95	17.6%	5.9%	73	+0.05	4.50	170	87
Logan Evans R 2024 · 4.17 FIP	23	SP-	4.17	17.8%	10.3%	2.3%	.257	4.17	17.9%	10.2%	125	+0.00	4.17	232	86
Bryce Conley R 2018 · 4.71 FIP	23	SP-	4.71	20.2%	12.2%	3.2%	.269	4.88	17.4%	3.3%	197	+0.17	4.22	560	86
Logan Martin R 2024 · 3.95 FIP	23	SP-	3.95	16.9%	8.9%	2.1%	.278	4.58	17.6%	5.0%	140	+0.63	3.95	242	85
Josh Bostick R 2024 · 4.65 FIP	22	SP	4.65	19.3%	11.2%	3.2%	.304	5.40	21.7%	12.6%	119	+0.75	4.65	226	85
Garrett Burhenn R 2023 · 4.39 FIP	23	SP-	4.39	13.5%	8.4%	2.5%	.312	4.36	18.1%	10.2%	247	-0.03	4.30	433	85
Tyler Uberstine R 2022 · 4.19 FIP	23	SP-	4.19	19.5%	10.5%	2.6%	.302	4.27	22.8%	15.4%	121	+0.08	2.98	262	85
Nick Dean R 2024 · 3.86 FIP	23	SP-	3.86	17.5%	8.1%	2.2%	.275	3.47	21.7%	14.6%	111	-0.39	2.73	202	84
J.P. France R 2019 · 5.32 FIP	24	SP-	5.32	17.9%	13.9%	3.6%	.285	4.24	26.3%	15.2%	225	-1.08	4.04	577	84
Kenten Egbert R 2024 · 4.26 FIP	23	SP-	4.26	19.6%	9.6%	2.9%	.257	4.34	10.8%	3.5%	133	+0.08	4.04	231	84
Jimmy Endersby R 2021 · 4.29 FIP	23	SP-	4.29	20.9%	14.1%	2.1%	.310	5.71	16.3%	4.2%	225	+1.42	2.86	357	84
Jacob Meador R 2024 · 5.34 FIP	23	SP-	5.34	15.6%	14.0%	3.2%	.301	6.73	14.7%	-6.6%	50	+1.39	5.34	139	84
Tommy Mace R 2022 · 5.47 FIP	23	SP	5.47	16.0%	12.1%	4.0%	.261	5.04	14.7%	2.7%	376	-0.43	4.86	501	83
Dinelson Lamet R 2015 · 4.36 FIP	23	SP	4.36	20.1%	11.8%	2.7%	.272	3.69	24.2%	13.1%	293	-0.67	2.11	778	83
Trenton Toplikar R 2019 · 4.32 FIP	23	SP-	4.32	14.8%	10.1%	2.2%	.248	5.39	16.5%	6.4%	123	+1.07	4.32	232	83
Noah Denoyer R 2021 · 4.51 FIP	23	SP-	4.51	21.5%	12.1%	3.1%	.275	4.10	25.7%	15.7%	121	-0.41	3.26	181	83

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 2,161 pitcher careers (1,251 from 1990-2025 + 910 historical, 1901-2023), also matched on career-to-date at the same age. * Historical (Lahman) careers: rates era-adjusted to 2001-24 league levels; WAR is an OGILVIE proxy.

Player	162s	IP/yr	K%	BB%	HR/9	ERA
OGILVIE CAREER PROJECTION	4.6	93	20.3%	9.9%	1.17	4.69
Scott Sanders ('99)	3.4	97	21.2%	9.3%	1.23	4.86
Chad Kuhl ('24)	3.3	84	20.0%	10.4%	1.31	4.98
Bud Norris ('18)	6.1	122	21.7%	9.1%	1.15	4.45
Mike Bielecki ('84-'97, 9 WAR*)	6.2	95	18.4%*	9.1%*	1.15*	4.47*
Mickey Mahler ('77-'86, 0 WAR*)	2.0	81	20.4%*	10.3%*	1.20*	4.87*
Dave Hamilton ('72-'80, 2 WAR*)	3.5	78	21.3%*	10.2%*	1.13*	4.58*